Green Movement’s Selective Outrage Over ESA Reforms

By Vijay Jayaraj

President Donald Trump announced on Truth Social that his administration had returned the Endangered Species Act (ESA) “to how it was intended to be,” invoking the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s reading of the statute and initiating the crocodile tears of anti-development activists.

The administration’s view is that regulators committed to regulatory expansion had turned the 1973 law into an automatic impediment to human activity rather than a targeted protection of threatened species. In 2012, Justice Scalia called regulators’ broadening of the statute from guarding against injuring animals to protecting habitat “a terrible interpretation” of congressional intent. He rejected the notion that every form of ecosystem modification should automatically count as prohibited “harm.”

To nobody’s surprise, the reaction of activists has been extreme. The administration action “guts protections for threatened wildlife,” announced the Center for Biological Diversity. Earthjustice attorney Kristen Boyles said, “This broad attack on endangered wildlife is un-American.”

But where was this outrage when the Biden administration permitted the killing of bald eagles and whales to erect its politically favored wind turbines? Many of the same voices have spent years promoting large “green” energy projects that inflicted harm on birds, bats, marine mammals, and sensitive habitats.

Permission Slips for Slaughter
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issues incidental take permits that authorize operators to injure or kill eagles as a cost of turbine operation. A 2024 rule went further, creating streamlined general permits so that qualifying projects could register for coverage rather than endure case-by-case review.

Biologists have warned that eagle mortality at wind facilities is widespread and badly undercounted. California regulators are now scrambling to protect golden eagles from the very machines the state subsidized into existence.

The press has largely averted its eyes. Legacy outlets grant turbines a free pass on bird kills that would trigger front-page fury if a refinery caused them. The carnage extends well beyond eagles. Studies document how wildlife pays the bill for so-called clean power across three continents. In my own country of India, transmission lines and turbine arrays are pushing the Great Indian Bustard toward oblivion.

Whales nobody mourn

Move offshore and it gets worse. Federal regulators have granted harassment authorizations that permit developers to disturb and even kill whales during seismic surveying and pile driving for offshore wind projects along the Atlantic seaboard.

Research has raised concerns that this acoustic disturbance may be directly related to whale injuries and deaths. When the administration ordered a review of federal leasing and permitting practices for offshore wind, the same activists weeping about the ESA revision called the pause an assault on the planet.

North Atlantic right whales’ numbers have dwindled to the low hundreds. Dead humpbacks washed ashore in New Jersey and New York through the survey years, and the groups that would have filed emergency legal motions over a single oil spill explained why nothing was connected to anything.

You do not have to oppose offshore wind energy to acknowledge that marine wildlife deserves the same level of concern regardless of which energy source is involved. The same biased pattern extends onto land through utility-scale solar as well. Large solar installations require vast tracts of open space. Those projects often proceed with enthusiastic backing because they satisfy political agendas.

Residents across New York are resisting 18 planned solar developments that would carpet protected and agricultural land, kill wildlife and deliver modest electricity in return. These are farmers and hunters who traffic in the habitat themselves. Career environmentalists sided with solar.

The Tell
A movement that meant what it said would have fought hardest where the killing was authorized, measured and ongoing. It would have demanded that every turbine or solar panel face the scrutiny natural gas compressors do. It would have treated a 30-year eagle take permit as the scandal it plainly is.

Instead, the activists chose sides by fuel. Wildlife deaths caused by hydrocarbons were a moral travesty. Identical deaths caused by subsidized wind and solar became an acceptable trade, a transition cost, a footnote to “saving the world.” That is a political program wearing conservation as a costume.

Originally published at American Greatness, August 22nd, 2026.

Vijay Jayaraj is a Science and Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Fairfax, Virginia. He holds an M.S. in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the U.K., and a bachelor’s in engineering from Anna University, India. He served as a research associate with the Changing Oceans Research Unit at University of British Columbia, Canada.

Tags: wind turbinesESAUnited StatesIndiaVijay Jayaraj

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
5 5 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
9 Comments
Bob
September 8, 2026 10:12 pm

I wouldn’t permit the taking of a mouse for systems that everybody knows can’t sustain the grid. The green movement can go to hell, they have shown their colors. Concerning environmental issues all we need to ask is what would Justice Scalia do?

John Pickens
September 8, 2026 11:21 pm

Residents across New York are resisting 18 planned solar developments that would carpet protected and agricultural land, kill wildlife and deliver modest electricity in return. 

Wind/solar/battery grid power systems do not deliver even modest electricity They consume more energy in their construction and operation than they can ever produce in their operational lifetimes.

Why are we doing this, again?

Reply to  John Pickens
September 8, 2026 11:38 pm

‘Cuz its not modest electricity, it is proud electricity.

Much along the same lines as the child who came in last in the race is proud of their participation trophy.

Keitho
Editor
Reply to  John Pickens
September 9, 2026 1:14 am

Money.

Chris Hanley
September 9, 2026 12:12 am

Wildlife deaths caused by hydrocarbons were a moral travesty. Identical deaths caused by subsidized wind and solar became an acceptable trade

To avoid the risk of unsettling cognitive dissonance they rationalize the apparent contradiction viz. wildlife protection vs wind and solar farms by framing the latter as ‘climate protection’.

Bob B.
Reply to  Chris Hanley
September 9, 2026 4:17 am

For all the trillions of dollars, millions of acres of habitat and farmland and the sacrifice of countless eagles, bats, whales, dolphin, etc. in the name of Climate Protection over the last several decades, we should at least be able to quantify the positive results. But, alas, there are none. The only ROI is in the pockets of the scammers. Everyone else can go to hell.

Mike Larkin
September 9, 2026 1:44 am

If a farmer, rancher, or hunter accidentally kills a protected eagle, Bald or Golden, they can face a $50k fine.

It shows the hypocrisy and pure bad faith of the ruinables mob that they take the slaughter of hundreds of those eagles with equanimity and hand wavium.

September 9, 2026 2:29 am

Two faced political standards are nothing new. Look at SNAP benefits still including soda and chips—MAHA versus Pepsi). Look at California wildfire regulations. Look at nursing home protections. Look at voter registration protections.
Politicians like two faced standards because they can profit no matter what the eventual outcome—either from corporate lobbyists or opposed NGOs.
Is why most enter politics poor, but leave rich.
Exceptions include Pritzger (entered rich, leaving poorer due to state impoverishment policies— no cash bail, sanctuary status, reject federal crime help ) and Trump (entered rich, leaving richer due to America First policies).

September 9, 2026 4:41 am

Good thing we don’t believe in human made climate change.

That would cause real problems.

That make us feel bad. So we just ignore it until it goes away.

And again some cfact level opportunistic environmentalism without any proof.